08-04-2016, 04:04 PM
" ... Hess and Philipp really are presenting a non-local scheme, as Gill says."
No they're not. Gill's argument is supported by the belief that lambda can be "anything." Hess and Phillip introduced a separate time index. (" ... the outcomes conditional to lambda may still depend on the space-time coordinates, and outcome independence conditional to lambda is not guaranteed. For example, clocks in the two stations can show correlations no matter what was sent out from a source." ~ Einstein was Right! p. 80)
"I'm talking to those who accept Bell but still reject non-locality."
The better question for Gill is why he thinks non-locality is not a prior assumption of Bell's theorem.
No they're not. Gill's argument is supported by the belief that lambda can be "anything." Hess and Phillip introduced a separate time index. (" ... the outcomes conditional to lambda may still depend on the space-time coordinates, and outcome independence conditional to lambda is not guaranteed. For example, clocks in the two stations can show correlations no matter what was sent out from a source." ~ Einstein was Right! p. 80)
"I'm talking to those who accept Bell but still reject non-locality."
The better question for Gill is why he thinks non-locality is not a prior assumption of Bell's theorem.